What About Our 'own' Convictions?

[AVBibleBeliever]

We do need to be careful in calling their system false.  Are not you the one who was saying that ONLY those who are by your standard and IFB should lead a study.  Here is your opportunity to put your fingers where you mouth is and lead them by study as a bonafide IFB minister.

 

I am not saying they are correct but lead them through a study on the topic and then show them it could not have included infants.  If you can't come to the conclusion or it is silent has God not allowed for correcting by his Holy Ghost?  Or is it up to us to just label their doctrine false, heresies and a slue of other titles to which we wipe our hands clean and walk off?

 

Ok, so take the baptism verses in the gospels where John is baptizing and show that "ALL Judea and ALL the region of the Jordon coming to him for baptism" did not include infants.

 

Then use the one in Acts 16 and show by contextual study the "was baptized, he and all his, straightway." that the "ALL his" included or did not include babies and why it could not have included babies. 

 

Would not this be a better way of admonition than a scathing rebuke labeling their practice (that does not affect their salvation in one ioda) false, heresy or any other label you would choose to use? 

 

One request don't go to the Greek use the English to prove your point,.  Going to the Greek will not help (it generally singles out a single word from the context and attributes the meaning of a doctrine from the man or his organization) this will only confuse and cloud the issue, we are not Koine Greek speaking we are English speaking.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Baptizing is not pouring out.  It is immersion.  Pouring out is translated from the Greek "excheo".  Ekcheo is never used in regards to water baptism in the original autographs.

And whether you like it or not, sometimes it is important to go to the Greek and Hebrew. 

[Covenanter]

Baptizing is not pouring out.  It is immersion.  Pouring out is translated from the Greek "excheo".  Ekcheo is never used in regards to water baptism in the original autographs.

And whether you like it or not, sometimes it is important to go to the Greek and Hebrew. 

It's possible that the KJV translators went to the Gk & Hebrew, & their understanding of baptism was different from yours. You might like to look at they way they translated the various words relating to baptism.

 

And how did you get access to the original autographs?

[Standing Firm In Christ]

We don't have the originals, but we have copies of the originals... apographs.   All the Greek and Hebrews words in the originals, copied. 

 

[HappyChristian]

Apograph - new word for me, SFIC. Thanks. 

[heartstrings]

I posted this in a previous thread... what do you think?

 

"Here we go, bashing someone else's beliefs on 'what' the scriptures plainly teach from a believers own view.

Are we not aloud to believe our own 'convictions'? ''believing'' your own convictions is one thing; voicing them is another

 

It scares me how Scwenke can be so 'clear' in what he says, (and be wrong 'from my perspective'), and he is aloud to

be a 'believer'; yet someone else can be a 'false teacher' by also believing the scriptures 'clearly'. Scwenke is IFB, KJB and this a KJB, IFB forum

 

The road does go both ways. Both use the same 'road', yet only one can be right.

But does one being 'right', cancel out what the other guy believes from his own experience in Bible study, and that for years of study?

 

How is it that two diverse fella's, both with years of reading and studying the scriptures, come up with different views of the scriptures, and

disagree with eachother, how can they say to eachother, you are a false teacher?

 

Doesn't it have to do with experience, spiritually with the Lord? How can you call one's convictions that he learned from God in his own relationship, wrong doctrine.

PrOBably with these words - 'you are not understanding what God is saying here...'.

 

We have the mind of Christ. 

 

Any thoughts?

 

Maybe a new thread."

 

 

 

Anything anyone? Do we 'have' to agree?

I've been an IFB for some 28 years but have been out of my 'element' much as you are, here on this forum, because I have been attending a SBC for 3 years. During those 3 years, I still don't like the rock music, the pants on women, the men in shorts with 'necklaces', the tOBacco chewing, the MV's and some of the other things that SBC  folks do. But though we still try to 'live right, dress right and spit white', we don't try to impose our beliefs on the SBC's because, again, I feel out of my element there. But here, on this IFB forum, I can still voice such things as that the King James Bible (not 'version') is God's pure, holy, inerrant, unadulterated Word for English Speaking people and that the others are corrupted and false, that Jesus Christ is coming back in the clouds pre-millennially, that Israel has not been 'replaced', and that Calvinism is lie and a slander against the name of the Lord Jesus Christ: because this is an IFB forum; not a ''Geneva bible'' forum. Why are you here: to learn or to sway others to your doctrine?

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Apograph - new word for me, SFIC. Thanks. 

Webster's 1828 Dictionary [A-J]
apograph

AP'OGRAPH n. Gr. An exemplar; a copy or transcript.

[HappyChristian]

Webster's 1828 Dictionary [A-J]
apograph

AP'OGRAPH n. Gr. An exemplar; a copy or transcript.

Thanks, I looked it up to see if I was right in the meaning - I was (college Greek comes in handy at times ).  I love learning new words.  Even if I am pathetic...

[Standing Firm In Christ]

The point is, while it is not the original papyrus that we have, we do have the original words written on other media.  And there is nothing wrong with going to the original languages to see how a particular word was used.

Words change meanings all the time.  Up until the 19th Century, wine was generic in our language.  Up until the mid-20th, gay did not mean a sodomite. 

When one sees "gay clothing in the Bible, if the language of today dictates that gay always refers to one who is a sodomite, it could easily be misconstrued to mean James was speaking of sodomites attire.

So, there is absolutely nothing wrong with looking to the original meaning of words written in the Bible.

[Genevanpreacher]

But here, on this IFB forum, I can still voice such things as that the King James Bible (not 'version') is God's pure, holy, inerrant, unadulterated Word for English Speaking people and that the others are corrupted and false, that Jesus Christ is coming back in the clouds pre-millennially, that Israel has not been 'replaced', and that Calvinism is lie and a slander against the name of the Lord Jesus Christ: because this is an IFB forum; not a ''Geneva bible'' forum. Why are you here: to learn or to sway others to your doctrine?

 

I feel you are right about the KJV, that it is the KJB, when comparing it to the vast 'foundation' of sources from which the translators gathered the text, in multiple languages.

It properly is a translation in that sense.

 

Now about the rest, I can't sway anyone my way, it's against the rules, and I have broken the rules too much as it is. 

I came, yes to try to 'sway' as you term it, but looked like 'the fool' when I tried. (I OBviously am new at the forums.)

And I don't like doing that, it's embarrassing. Yet, I moved on, and left 'it' out most of the time, using bad judgement

at times, and getting points.

 

I am just a simple country preacher, a Cincinnati suburb 'convert', who only has the knowledge of hearing the word of God

in a simple independent Baptist church in Southeastern Indiana (no longer in existence), and reading and studying the word of God myself.

Where the preacher preached and taught from the KJB (and he always did), teaching various 'doctrinal' subjects.

I was licensed to preach by our congregation in 1990. Giving me 'permission' to preach or teach whenever, or where ever

I have opportunity to magnify my Lord.

I have the same 'doctrines' that I have gathered from the Holy Scriptures, that I perceived from various Churches that our

Church fellow-shipped with for years. I never 'saw' some of the 'doctrines' in those independent Baptist Churches, that I read

about on this forum.

 

I OBviously have increased in wisdom while here.

And I am trying to be more considerate of other beliefs than I did at my first postings.

I cannot, and will not defend my position that you mentioned about the 'Bible of my preference'.

 

Thank you for any prayers for my strength to be the right strength.

And my beliefs to be the right beliefs.

[heartstrings]

I feel you are right about the KJV, that it is the KJB, when comparing it to the vast 'foundation' of sources from which the translators gathered the text, in multiple languages.

It properly is a translation in that sense.

 

Now about the rest, I can't sway anyone my way, it's against the rules, and I have broken the rules too much as it is. 

I came, yes to try to 'sway' as you term it, but looked like 'the fool' when I tried. (I OBviously am new at the forums.)

And I don't like doing that, it's embarrassing. Yet, I moved on, and left 'it' out most of the time, using bad judgement

at times, and getting points.

 

I am just a simple country preacher, a Cincinnati suburb 'convert', who only has the knowledge of hearing the word of God

in a simple independent Baptist church in Southeastern Indiana (no longer in existence), and reading and studying the word of God myself.

Where the preacher preached and taught from the KJB (and he always did), teaching various 'doctrinal' subjects.

I was licensed to preach by our congregation in 1990. Giving me 'permission' to preach or teach whenever, or where ever

I have opportunity to magnify my Lord.

I have the same 'doctrines' that I have gathered from the Holy Scriptures, that I perceived from various Churches that our

Church fellow-shipped with for years. I never 'saw' some of the 'doctrines' in those independent Baptist Churches, that I read

about on this forum.

 

I OBviously have increased in wisdom while here.

And I am trying to be more considerate of other beliefs than I did at my first postings.

I cannot, and will not defend my position that you mentioned about the 'Bible of my preference'.

 

Thank you for any prayers for my strength to be the right strength.

And my beliefs to be the right beliefs.

I meant that the King James is THE, ONLY, REAL Bible for the English language, God's pure Word. Everything else is a version, or a flawed translation.

[Genevanpreacher]

I meant that the King James is THE, ONLY, REAL Bible for the English language, God's pure Word. Everything else is a version, or a flawed translation.

 

I understood it as such, from your post.

Thanks for the clarifying though.

[heartstrings]

Just wanted to make sure we were clear on that.

[Invicta]

The prOBlem to restricting false teacher to only "salvation" is that some say the right things but mean something different and it is often indicated by these so called minor issues.

For instance, the matter of infant Baptism.
Some hold that it is an unimportant issue as far as salvation is concerned.
They SAY they teach biblical salvation, but infant baptism has to have a reason behind it.
And in the vast majority of cases the reason for infant baptism is to "keep the child safe until they are able to believe" or something along those lines.
So their baptism becomes part of salvation regardless of what they might SAY about it.
Also, infant baptism is usually associated with a following of universal church. It makes one "a part of the body of Christ" is normally how they would put it - but it is universal church speak.
So we now have baptism as a part of salvation and (universal) church membership as part of salvation.

So infant baptism is an indicator of far greater false teaching.

And if you examine many of what you have redefined not to be false teaching you find similar issues.

And to introduce the tithe into this thread smacks of an attempt to derail, for you know full well that it is a red rag to a bull for some here.

Please don't let's discuss tithing in this thread - it is a side issue IN THIS CONTEXT.

 

Do you know any Paedo Baptists here?

[DaveW]

Do you know any Paedo Baptists here?

There are indications.......